NAEEM AHMED Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the writ petitioner. The appellant was granted a licence for storage of minor mineral. In an inspection, it was found that the appellant was carrying out illegal mining activities. Consequently, a notice was issued to the appellant proposing to impose fine of Rs. 52,03,275/-. Penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- is also imposed. The appellant replied to the said notice but finally the liability of Rs. 26,89,190/- was fixed by one Mr. Vinay Shankar Pandey, Director, Geology and Mining Unit, Uttarakhand. The appellant preferred an appeal. The very same person, namely, Mr. Vinay Shankar Pandey, holding the charge of Additional Secretary, Mining, heard the appeal and dismissed the appeal.

(2.) The learned Single Judge, in the writ petition filed by the petitioner, found merit in the contention that the same authority has decided the appeal. The impugned order dated 22.05.2017 was quashed and the writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the appeal preferred by the appellant be decided by the Secretary, Mining in accordance with law.

(3.) We heard Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Brief Holder on behalf of the State of Uttarakhand/respondents.